LITEKATTJBE. 
11 
distinguished by their fauna. Those horizons are enumerated by Noet- 
ling, as follows : — 
1^10. Sagenites beds. 
1 9. Halorites beds. 
Upper Trias -{ 8. Hauerites beds. 
I 7. Trofites beds. 
6. Joannites beds. 
n/r-jji rr • r 5- Ptychites beds. 
Middle Trias i . , , 
4. Kooustites beds. 
i' 3. Stephanites beds. 
2. Hedenstroemia beds. 
1. Priomlohus beds. 
Regarding tlie Lower Trias, Noetliiig admits that the Stephanites 
beds^ are only known from Byans and that there is no evidence of 
their being overlain directly by the Robustites beds (with Ceratites 
subrobustus). 
He considers the mass of unfossihferous limestone resting conform- 
ably on the horizon of Rhynchonella Griesbachi and followed by the 
beds containing Spiriferina Stracheyi as the lowest element of the 
Middle Trias (Muschelkalk) ; for this mass of limestones the name of 
Niti limestone is introduced. 
In Spiti the boundary line between the ladinic and carnic stages is 
drawn by him right across the Grey beds, although their basal Cepha- 
lopod horizon with Joannites cymbiformis contain;, a fauna of decidedly 
carnic habit. The Daonella beds with Halobia coniata of the Shalshal 
cliff are also correlated erroneously witli the ladinic stage (page 147). 
The great difference in the thickness of nearly all the zones of 
Upper Triassic age in Spiti and Painkhanda which is abundantly evi- 
dent from A. V. Kraft't's sections, is considered doubtful. The affinities 
between the Himalayan and Alpine faunae of Middle and Upper Triassic 
age appear to him rather distant. " The affinities with the Alpine 
Trias are marked by a general relationship, by the association of 
various genera only (page 158).^ The faunae of Lower Triassic age have 
no affinity whatever with those of the Eastern Alps. There is, indeed, 
i The genus Stephanites is altogether unknown from the Lower Trias of the 
Himalayas. 
~ This statement is contradicted by a footnote, which has been added by 
Freeh. 
'. 212 ) 
